ArchAngel, I'll agree. When you buy a $200 gun, you'll usually get a $200 gun.
What I disagree with is the implication that a $200 gun is generally a bad weapon. I can think of some I wouldn't use as a carry weapon, but there are a lot of imported gems in this price range or lower, including various Bersa 380 models and a handful of tough milsurp handguns like the CZ82.
You might say that when you pay big bucks for a gun, you don't always get that much extra value from it. Here we're talking about a possible HD/SD gun. When you look at the "finely crafted," expensive, high-strung compacts, they are the ones that tend to be picky. I can't be the only one who ever heard of a Seecamp that was super-picky about ammo. I certainly can't be the only one who heard about the reliability problems associated with trying to shrink the 1911 down to a more compact size.
Now, I realize you're probably not talking about either extreme. I think we can all agree that it wouldn't be ideal to trust our lives to super-cheap options like the various "ring of fire" guns, Cobras, Skyy, and in some cases even Hi-Point. We can also probably agree that a picky, high-strung race gun with super tight tolerances isn't an ideal choice for rigorous HD/SD duty either.
I suspect that you were suggesting the midrange weapons, which are usually fine guns from major makers with a lot of examples in the hands of "regular folks" and professionals. I looked at some Springfield XDs and Glocks that were in this price range. I think they're fine guns, and I'd trust one for HD/SD duty. But I also trust my Bersas, which have never failed in any way with a variety of ammo. I don't feel like I "settled" for a $200 gun when I bought my Bersa Thunder 380. I feel like I got a great gun for about $200 that I could trust as much or more than I'd trust a Walther for twice the price.